"Modern, serious music has become embroiled in an intellectual discussion that has no place in music. Certainly, the great composer of the past were geniuses and used their intellect, but only to serve their emotions and guide their craft. Not to dictate to them what they should or shouldn't write" - Michael Kamen, 1995

I don't know how I will feel with the end result. I will happily see it just to finally say I've seen an Alien film in theatres. I'm kind of hoping maybe a further look into life on the Alien planet. Always intrigued by back story details - I don't know why.

More importantly [to me]...Any suggestions on who should score this?

I'm expecting to hear a clamor for James Horner. I doubt that it would happen. Anybody want to hire a necromancer and bring back Jerry? I wonder what their hourly rate is...probably a flat fee. Hmmm...

I wouldn't be surprised if this never gets made. Have you seen the list of movies he supposedly is going to direct?! Ridley probably said "yes" because he can't say "no" anymore. Also, I agree with the poster who said that "the alien has lost its mojo". I would much more prefer if Scott did Brave New World and Forever War.

Alex

I have this crazy theory about science fiction. I think all science fiction movies are inherently nostalgic. I think Blade Runner is one of the most nostalgic movies you can think of. Gattaca is incredibly nostalgic somehow. So with this nostalgia, they become weirdly personal. And that got me back to where we were starting which was by going as far away from humanity and Earth as we possibly could in this movie. Every moment needed to remind us of who we are or question of who we are or make us an ache for who we left behind. - Hans Zimmer

This sounds cool, I've always wanted to see the space jockey alive and kicking! Hope they do it justice, though. As far as the score is concerned, I don't have anything against Horner, as far as he could do his job as masterfully as he did on Aliens. Silvestri also wouldn't be a bad choice.

Human aggression is instinctual. Humans have not evolved any ritualised aggression-inhibiting mechanisms to ensure the survival of the species. For this reason man is considered a very dangerous animal.

I like his work. So, I guess he could give it a shot. I know his basic style for horror score. Should he do this...I would hope he wouldn't get stuck on autopilot. He's had a tendency for that, as of late.

Well, why not? He did a terrific job on Predator, so I'm sure he wouldn't disappoint.

Human aggression is instinctual. Humans have not evolved any ritualised aggression-inhibiting mechanisms to ensure the survival of the species. For this reason man is considered a very dangerous animal.

I have this crazy theory about science fiction. I think all science fiction movies are inherently nostalgic. I think Blade Runner is one of the most nostalgic movies you can think of. Gattaca is incredibly nostalgic somehow. So with this nostalgia, they become weirdly personal. And that got me back to where we were starting which was by going as far away from humanity and Earth as we possibly could in this movie. Every moment needed to remind us of who we are or question of who we are or make us an ache for who we left behind. - Hans Zimmer

Human aggression is instinctual. Humans have not evolved any ritualised aggression-inhibiting mechanisms to ensure the survival of the species. For this reason man is considered a very dangerous animal.

Um, yea, ok, this is not a good idea. What's the point of a prequel, anyways, for the Alien franchise? We've already had two AvP movies that show Aliens in stasis buried deep underground in Earth for thousands of years. Are they gonna make a movie to explain that? A prequel to the first Alien movie, to set up Tom Skeritt's crew before their hibernation sleep, or the civilization that trapped the Aliens inside the ship on that otherwise uninhabited planet? What's the point of prequelling that part, but not the Earth part? Alien functions because you don't know anything about the crew other than what the movie tells you, and because the scary man-eating Alien is so effective. Ooh, the conspiracy that put an android saboteur onboard the ship to compel the crew to that planet in the first place is SO interesting.

I know what they should do next. I want a prequel to Jaws. I want to see Chief Brody as a young man, how Quint got so crazy. Ooh, I also want to see the Shark get born and grow up.

What a coincidence, wojo, a "prequel" is actually the only thing about this news that makes sense to me. I like the idea of a cosmos that is still unaware of the galaxy beast. If it's in any way possible, the mystique of the alien should be restored. It shouldn't be about the further adventures of the Alien on Earth. In fact, I find it only normal that Scott is going to ignore these silly exploitation movies.

Alex

I have this crazy theory about science fiction. I think all science fiction movies are inherently nostalgic. I think Blade Runner is one of the most nostalgic movies you can think of. Gattaca is incredibly nostalgic somehow. So with this nostalgia, they become weirdly personal. And that got me back to where we were starting which was by going as far away from humanity and Earth as we possibly could in this movie. Every moment needed to remind us of who we are or question of who we are or make us an ache for who we left behind. - Hans Zimmer

I agree with wojo 100%. Why does the Space Jockey scene work? Because it fuels your imagination. It makes you wonder "What the frig happened here?" Just because we've always wondered about the Alien homeworld and backstory, doesn't mean it should be spelled out for us. Have the Star Wars prequels taught us nothing? Usually, it's better to just wonder... That's why they call it WONDER-ful.

Eh, how wonderful were the sequels and the silly exploitation movies, hedji? I'm afraid I'm going to have to disagree with wojo and you now (and probably with 99% of the board too). That's the reason why Scott goes prequel, to ignore the BS that happened after Alien and Aliens. He wants to pretend that Aliens3, Alien Resurrection and Alien Meets Predator 1 & 2 never existed and the only way to do that is to go 'Prequel'. It's the only thing that makes sense.

Alex

I have this crazy theory about science fiction. I think all science fiction movies are inherently nostalgic. I think Blade Runner is one of the most nostalgic movies you can think of. Gattaca is incredibly nostalgic somehow. So with this nostalgia, they become weirdly personal. And that got me back to where we were starting which was by going as far away from humanity and Earth as we possibly could in this movie. Every moment needed to remind us of who we are or question of who we are or make us an ache for who we left behind. - Hans Zimmer

Any prequel, even with the legendary Ridley Scott at the helm, would only be another exploitation movie by the studios to milk the franchise, to watch more hapless people and marines get disemboweled in fun, clever ways by terrifying computer-generated monsters. Yes, you can argue that the jewels of the franchise, Alien and Aliens, were directed by Scott and Cameron, and thus bringing them back increases the chances of another home run, which 3, 4, AVP1 and AVP2 were most certainly not.

But it's still a bad idea, because at the start of Alien, the creatures are dormant eggs on the planet, the humans on the Nostromo don't know jack about the planet, and the android has his dark orders. Ripley as a young lass, perhaps? An entire planet of the Aliens or a society laid to waste centuries prior? What about the creatures that we don't know is worth knowing in a prequel movie?

Its a bad idea as Wojo said because despite Alex's views which are nice, we know the cats out of the bag, and we know how the aliens work. Another crew discovers the ship on Lv426 and this time they all get wiped out with one exception.
Someone will get faced hugged, someone will experience a chest burst, and to make the movie end properly the survivor will destroy the alienaliens (there cannot be a surviving alien because there were none encountered).

they could leave the human element out and make a brave movie strictly about the alien race that we see dead in the chair but that isn't a franchise extending storyline.

If it isn't high concept the it's not worth watching believed the pseudo superior one.

(there cannot be a surviving alien because there were none encountered).

Awwwwwwwwwww shucks. Is that entirely accurate? You can swim in shark infested water with a cut on your leg, as long as you get out of the water before the sharks show up, and if you don't see any, you can tell yourself there aren't any there.

LV-426 is a big planet. The Nostromo's crew didn't explore the planet, or spend more than a few hours on the planet. If there were mature Aliens anywhere else on the planet, they might not have had enough time to scamper over to the landing party, so all the Nostromo saw were eggs, which produced the single facehugger needed to start the process.

This is a very weak story prospect. Especially because the movies show the Aliens breeding only by facehugging people. It's not as if the Aliens are viable biological creatures, that reproduce sexually or asexually when they've got the time, and use facehuggers and chestbursters when there are potential hosts in the area. Nope. There wouldn't be herds of Aliens on the far side of the planet, to argue that they got there too late to ambush the landing party. They only breed as parasites, so if there are no people (or dogs, among other biological possibilites) on the planet, there won't be any Aliens.

The Aliens are terrifying movie monsters, evil incarnate which rape and violate their victims, so they don't deserve to be treated as if they're animals that we can understand. If anything, a "prequel" would explain where they ultimately came from, so many hundreds or thousands of years before the Nostromo came along. Potentially hundreds of thousands of years, if not longer, if you rationalize how old the alien temple in Antarctica was. I have a feeling that the Aliens were "created" as weapons of war by another alien race eons ago, they got loose, destroyed their creators, and somehow ended up on LV-426, where their eggs lay dormant waiting for hosts to breed. Is that exciting stuff? Potentially. Worthy of a movie? Meh.

Any prequel, even with the legendary Ridley Scott at the helm, would only be another exploitation movie by the studios to milk the franchise, to watch more hapless people and marines get disemboweled in fun, clever ways by terrifying computer-generated monsters. Yes, you can argue that the jewels of the franchise, Alien and Aliens, were directed by Scott and Cameron, and thus bringing them back increases the chances of another home run, which 3, 4, AVP1 and AVP2 were most certainly not.

Hmm, when I say exploitation, wojo, I mean that the films themselves, unlike the first two, feel like downright exploitations films. The studio wasn't planning on doing another Alien film unless Ridley would direct it and Scott already showed interest in doing a prequel years ago. If the studio were to milk the franchise, any story or director would do.

Its a bad idea as Wojo said because despite Alex's views which are nice, we know the cats out of the bag, and we know how the aliens work.

True and Ridley is well aware of this. That's why he said the other Alien movies didn't work, save for Cameron who wisely turned his film into an actioner), so maybe he's got something up his sleeve for the prequel.

Alex

I have this crazy theory about science fiction. I think all science fiction movies are inherently nostalgic. I think Blade Runner is one of the most nostalgic movies you can think of. Gattaca is incredibly nostalgic somehow. So with this nostalgia, they become weirdly personal. And that got me back to where we were starting which was by going as far away from humanity and Earth as we possibly could in this movie. Every moment needed to remind us of who we are or question of who we are or make us an ache for who we left behind. - Hans Zimmer

The studio wasn't planning on doing another Alien film unless Ridley would direct it and Scott already showed interest in doing a prequel years ago. If the studio were to milk the franchise, any story or director would do.

Alex

Ridley Scott's involvement might be merely a commercial stunt to spark new interest into what, you must agree, is already a dead franchise. Or is there something else, we don't know about, they can do with these movies? I choose not to be optimistic. At least not just yet. After all, this is not Alien and Blade Runner Ridley Scott we're watching for a long time now.

"Modern, serious music has become embroiled in an intellectual discussion that has no place in music. Certainly, the great composer of the past were geniuses and used their intellect, but only to serve their emotions and guide their craft. Not to dictate to them what they should or shouldn't write" - Michael Kamen, 1995

The studio wasn't planning on doing another Alien film unless Ridley would direct it and Scott already showed interest in doing a prequel years ago. If the studio were to milk the franchise, any story or director would do.

Alex

Ridley Scott's involvement might be merely a commercial stunt to spark new interest into what, you must agree, is already a dead franchise. Or is there something else, we don't know about, they can do with these movies? I choose not to be optimistic. At least not just yet. After all, this is not Alien and Blade Runner Ridley Scott we're watching for a long time now.

Well, the studios are hoping that Ridley will once again work his magic and make a classy film (and so bring new life into the franchise) instead of an el cheapo exploitation flick.

Alex

I have this crazy theory about science fiction. I think all science fiction movies are inherently nostalgic. I think Blade Runner is one of the most nostalgic movies you can think of. Gattaca is incredibly nostalgic somehow. So with this nostalgia, they become weirdly personal. And that got me back to where we were starting which was by going as far away from humanity and Earth as we possibly could in this movie. Every moment needed to remind us of who we are or question of who we are or make us an ache for who we left behind. - Hans Zimmer

"Modern, serious music has become embroiled in an intellectual discussion that has no place in music. Certainly, the great composer of the past were geniuses and used their intellect, but only to serve their emotions and guide their craft. Not to dictate to them what they should or shouldn't write" - Michael Kamen, 1995

But what can you do with a horror movie like this that we haven't seen before? I mean, it's the toughest genre out there... And yes, this is rethorical question.

Karol

Maybe Scott has got a new angle, a new idea that will justify not only a new Alien movie but also his signature under it. I certainly hope so but again, looking at his 'still to do list', chances are we will never see it.

Alex

I have this crazy theory about science fiction. I think all science fiction movies are inherently nostalgic. I think Blade Runner is one of the most nostalgic movies you can think of. Gattaca is incredibly nostalgic somehow. So with this nostalgia, they become weirdly personal. And that got me back to where we were starting which was by going as far away from humanity and Earth as we possibly could in this movie. Every moment needed to remind us of who we are or question of who we are or make us an ache for who we left behind. - Hans Zimmer

If Ridley Scott has some great idea about a new story to tell, then it might be worth it. Like I suggested throughout my ramblings, there are a few potentially promising places to go with the story, by explaining the creation of the Aliens or their earlier adventures.

However, how do you breathe new life into the franchise with prequels? Unless you go back so far into history as to be forgotten, or concentrate on a sentient non-human alien race that faced the Aliens, why spend all that money to reboot the franchise so that all of the story and character development must be forgotten when the original Alien movie begins? You can say that it's not exploitation because they're bringing the original genius back into the fold, but at this point in time, it still feels like a bad idea. Ex. Ploi. Tation.

Badmouth the SW prequels all you want, the reason they functionally work as prequels is that most of their exposition is not forgotten by the time Episode IV begins. Their stories were shoehorned in: Clone Wars, Anakin becoming Vader, Kenobi's training, the slaughter of the Jedi, and the rise of the Empire. The other stuff was just superfluous plot to flesh out two hour movies and sell toys and games.

Temple of Doom is officially a prequel, but it doesn't feel like one.

If we compare this Alien prequel to any franchise, we'd have to look at Wolverine. Logan spent two hours of screen time getting to that point, just so he could be zonked on the head and forget it all by the time the much earlier, but chronologically later, X-Men 1 begins. Yay. Ridley Scott, don't waste your time.

Do you like John Williams? His early work was a little too jazzy for my taste, but when Jaws came out in '75 I really think he came into his own, commercially and artistically. The whole album has a clear, crisp sound, and an air of consummate professionalism that really gives the pieces a big boost. He's been compared to Jerry Goldsmith but I think John has a far more leitmotif-driven style of composing. In '82 John composed this, E.T., his most accomplished album to date. I think his undisputed masterpiece is "The Magic of Halloween", a theme so catchy most people don't listen to what it means. But they should, because it's not just about the pleasures of childhood and the importance of friendship, it's also a personal statement about the man himself. Hey Paul! - Patrick Bateman on the Maestro

Except there was nothing flawed with the idea of the Star Wars prequels. It's just unfortunate that the execution turned out as lackluster as it did. (Although, I still mostly enjoy them.)

I still enjoy the Star Wars prequels too. They're damn entertaining and pretty to look at. But yeah, I don't need to see how Boba Fett got his start. And like Joey said, I don't need to know how Indy got his hat, whip, scar, fear of snakes, etc. Leave some things a mystery. Once you demystify the mysterious, you rob it of its appeal.

I wouldn't mind Ridley Scott making an Alien sequel, but I see no need to flesh out any backstory.

On the commentary for ALIEN (his original solo one on the 20th anniversary Legacy collection, not the Quadrilogy), he states that he would like to explore the backstory of the aliens and how they came to be. If this comes off and he sticks to that, I'm there without a shadow of a doubt.

Repeat the JWFan pledge after me: 'I hereby recognise John Towner Williams' place in the world as the great composer there has ever been, and I therefore renounce the works of Rozsa, Korngold, Herrmann, Horner, Kamen, Giacchino (unless the prophecy is fulfilled and he becomes the heir to JTW) and Goldsmith, especially Goldsmith. I understand that if I ever refer to Jurassic Park as anything less than "a masterpiece sixty-five million years in the making" I will be resigned to living out my days at the Zimmershrine.'

It would interesting to see who composes. Steitenfeld? Maybe by the time this gets made he will have moved on to a different composer. Seems he likes to stick with one guy for a few films and then move on.

Repeat the JWFan pledge after me: 'I hereby recognise John Towner Williams' place in the world as the great composer there has ever been, and I therefore renounce the works of Rozsa, Korngold, Herrmann, Horner, Kamen, Giacchino (unless the prophecy is fulfilled and he becomes the heir to JTW) and Goldsmith, especially Goldsmith. I understand that if I ever refer to Jurassic Park as anything less than "a masterpiece sixty-five million years in the making" I will be resigned to living out my days at the Zimmershrine.'